A Dynamic Viewpoint to Design Performance Management Systems in Academic Institutions: Theory and Practice

REFERENCES

• Adler, N. J., & Harzing, A. W. (2008). When knowledge wins: Transcending the sense and nonsense of academic rankings. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 8(1), 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agasisti, T., & Catalano, G. (2007). Efficienza ed equità nel sistema universitario italiano: gli effetti di quindici anni di riforme. In Proceedings of the XIX Conference on “Economia del capitale umano. Istituzioni, incentivi e valutazioni”, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica, Pavia, September 13–14.
   Google Scholar
• Amaral, A., & Magalhães, A. (2002). The emergent role of external stakeholders in European higher education governance. In A. Amaral, V. L. Meek, & I. M. Larsen (Eds.), Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance (pp. 1–21). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Ammons, D. (2001). Municipal benchmarks. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C. (2002). Introducing SD modeling into planning & control systems to manage SMEs growth: A learning-oriented perspective. System Dynamics Review, 18(3), 315–338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C. (2009a). Conceptual models and operative tools for improving customer satisfaction in the public sector. Reflections on Italian experiences. In Proceedings of the 1^st International SMOG Conference, Forlì, July 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C. (2009b). Modelli di System Dynamics per il Miglioramento della Performance Aziendale. Verso un sistema di programmazione e controllo per lo sviluppo sostenibile. Milan, Italy: Collana Management IPSOA.
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C. (2010). Improving performance and fostering accountability in the public sector through system dynamics modelling: From an ‘external’ to an ‘internal’ perspective. System Research and Behavioral Science, 27, 361–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C. (2012). Enhancing performance management and sustainable organizational growth through system-dynamics modelling. In S. N. Grösser & R. Zeier (Eds.), Systemic management for intelligent organizations (pp. 143–161). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C., & Montemaggiore, G. (2008). Enhancing strategy design and planning in public utilities through “dynamic” balanced scorecards: Insights from a project in a city water company. System Dynamics Review, 24(2), 175–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchi, C., & Rivenbark, W. (2012). Using system dynamics to enhance performance management in local government: An application to residential refuse collection. In Proceedings of the 2012 APPAM Fall Research Conference, Baltimore, November 8–10.
   Google Scholar
• Bleiklie, I. (2001). Towards European convergence of higher education policy? Higher Education Management, 13(3), 9–29.
   Google Scholar
• Boland, T., & Fowler, A. (2000). A systems perspective of performance management in public sector organisations. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13(5), 417–446.
   Google Scholar
• Bolognani, M., & Catalano, G. (2007). Strategies competitive ed università. Sviluppo & Organizzazione, 222, 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Broadbent, J. (2007). If you can’t measure it, how can you manage it? Management and governance in higher educational institutions. Public Money and Management, 27(3), 193–198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camp, R. C. (1989). Benchmarking: The search for best practices that lead to superior performance. Milwaukee, WI: ASQC Quality Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cave, M., Hanney, S., Henkel, M., & Kogan, M. (1997). The use of performance indicators in higher education. The challenge of the quality movement. London, UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Cepiku, D., & Meneguzzo, M. (2009). Public administration education in Italy: A statistical analysis. DSI Essay Series, Vol. 6. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Chenhall, R. H., & Langfield-Smith, K. (2007). Multiple perspectives of performance measures. European Management Journal, 25(4), 266–282.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities. Oxford, UK: IAU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cosenz, F. (2011). Sistemi di governo e di valutazione della performance per l’azienda “Università”. Milan, Italy: Giuffrè.
   Google Scholar
• Cosenz, F. (2013). The “Entrepreneurial University”: A preliminary analysis of the main managerial and organisational features towards the design of planning & control systems in European academic institutions. Management Research & Practice, 5(4), 19–36.
   Google Scholar
• Czarniawska, B., & Genell, K. (2002). Gone shopping? Universities on their way to the market. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 18, 455–474.
   Google Scholar
• Dearlove, J. (1998). The deadly dull issue of university “administration”? Good governance, managerialism and organising academic work. Higher Education Policy, 11, 59–79.
   Google Scholar
• De Boer, H., & Goedegebuure, L. (2001). On limitations and consequences of change: Dutch university governance in transition. Tertiary Education and Management, 7, 163–180.
   Google Scholar
• Deem, R. (1998). New ‘managerialism’ and higher education: The management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8(1), 47–70.
   Google Scholar
• Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewell, P. T. (1999). Linking performance measures to resource allocation: Exploring unmapped terrain. Quality in Higher Education, 5(3), 191–208.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald, L. (2007). Performance measurement. In T. Hopper, D. Northcott, & R. W. Scapens (Eds.), Issues in management accounting (3rd ed., pp. 223–241). Harlow, UK: FT Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie, J., & Neumann, R. (2007). Economic and non-financial performance indicators in universities. Public Management Review, 9(2), 231–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jongbloed, B., & Vossensteyn, H. (2001). Keeping up performances: An international survey of performance-based funding in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 23(2), 127–145.
   Google Scholar
• Keenoy, T., & Reed, M. I. (2008). Managing modernization: Introducing performance management in British Universities. In C. Mazza, P. Quattrone, & A. Riccaboni (Eds.), European universities in transition: Issues, models and cases (pp. 188–204). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Lapsley, I., & Miller, P. (2004). Transforming universities: The uncertain, erratic path. Financial Accountability and Management, 20(2), 103–106.
   Google Scholar
• Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2009). Europeanisation, international rankings and faculty mobility: Three cases in higher education globalization. In Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, Higher education to 2030, Volume 2: Globalisation (pp. 109–144), Paris, France: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Meek, V. L. (2003). Introduction. In A. Amaral, V. L. Meek, & I. M. Larsen (Eds.), The higher education managerial revolution? (pp. 1–29). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, B. A. (2007). Assessing organizational performance in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Modell, S. (2001). Performance measurement and institutional processes: A study of managerial responses to public sector reform. Management Accounting Research, 12, 437–464.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morecroft, J. (2007). Strategic modeling and business dynamics. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Neely, A. (1999). The performance measurement revolution: Why now and what next?. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(2), 205–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neely, A., Gregory, M., & Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design, a literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(4), 80–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neely, A., Kennerly, M., & Waters, A. (2004). Performance measurement and management: public and private. Cranfield, UK: Centre for Business Performance, Cranfield University.
   Google Scholar
• Oge, C., & Dickinson, H. (1992, December). Product development in the 1990s – new assets for improved capability. Economist Intelligence Unit, Japan Motor Business, 132–144.
   Google Scholar
• Otley, D. T. (1999). Performance management: A framework for management control systems research. Management Accounting Research, 10(4), 363–382.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, L. (2002). It’s been a pleasure doing business with you: A strategic analysis and critique of University change management. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 13(5/6), 603–619.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, L. (2011). University corporatisation: Driving redefinition. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 22(4), 434–450.
   Google Scholar
• Parmenter, D. (2007). Key performance indicators. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Pendlbury, M., & Algaber, N. (1997). Accounting for the cost of central support services in UK universities: A note. Financial Accountability & Management, 13(3), 281–288.
   Google Scholar
• Pitman, T. (2000). Perceptions of academics and students as customers: A survey of administrative staff in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(2), 165–175.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, W. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (1998). Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life science. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 17(2), 253–277.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Propper, C., & Wilson, D. (2003). The use and usefulness of performance measures in the public sector. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(2), 250–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reponen, T. (1999). Is leadership possible at loosely coupled organizations such as universities?. Higher Education Policy, 12(3), 237–244.
   Google Scholar
• Richmond, B. (2001). A new language for leveraging scorecard-driven learning. Reprinted from “Balanced Scorecard Report”, Harvard Business School Publications, 3(1), 11–14.
   Google Scholar
• Ritchie-Dunham, J. L. (2001). Informing mental models for strategic decision-making with ERPs and the balanced scorecard: A simulation-based experiment. In Proceedings of the 19th System Dynamics International Conference, Atlanta, July 23–27.
   Google Scholar
• Salter, B., & Tapper, T. (2002). The external pressures on the internal governance of universities. Higher Education Quarterly, 3(3), 245–256.
   Google Scholar
• Saravanamuthu, K., & Tinker, T. (2002). The university in the new corporate world. Critical Perspective on Accounting, 13(5/6), 545–554.
   Google Scholar
• Sporn, B. (2003). Management in higher education: Current trends and future perspectives in European colleges and universities. In R. Begg (Ed.), The dialogue between higher education research and practice (pp. 97–108). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. London, UK: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, T. A. (1997). Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations. New York, NY: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Van de Walle, S., & Van Dooren, W. (2010). How is information used to improve performance in the public sector? Exploring the dynamics of performance information. In K. Walshe, G. Harvey, & P. Jas (Eds.), Connecting knowledge and performance in public services (pp. 33–54). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, K. (2008). Strategic management dynamics. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar